Pages

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Stealth Update in Watsonville Tomorrow

Betcha didn’t know about any of this. That’s why I call it the Stealth Update. RWQCB hearing in Watsonville tomorrow. Car pools are forming if you’re interested in attending or check the email addresses below if you wish to send in public comment. Make sure your email states that you want this presented to the whole board as public comment. Speak now or forever – and I mean that literally – keep your silence and forget about your rights: they’ll be toast and all of California will become Los Osos.

March 20 item 18 onsite septic regulation--- tell the board to "table it now"

Watsonville City Council Chambers275 Main Street - 4th Floor (new bldg)Watsonville, CA 95076 ( map on the water board site)
If you can't attend the meeting Friday in Watsonville please email or fax a message to protest the Water Board resolution #R3-2009-0012 and the onsite septic systems criteria developed in May 2008. You must have your voice heard and your message 'on the record' to protect your property rights.

Citizens for Clean Water www.citizens4cleanwater.org Gail McPherson 805-534-1913

Water board site http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb3/
Agenda http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb3/board_info/agendas/2009/mar/MAR09agn_web.htm
Staff contact Sorrel Marks
email smarks@waterboards.ca.gov
Phone:549-3695
Ombudsman - Michael Thomas at 805 542-4623
FAX: Before the meeting-----788-3511
Day of meeting: 831-761-0736

A hearing to complete the adoption of the costly AB 885 revisions in Sacramento is on hold for now, thanks to recent bills introduced, but our Region 3 Central Coast Regional Water Board is adopting more stringent regulations than AB 885 state standards require, by amending the regional basin plan septic criteria (Resolution R3-2008-06 approved by the board in May 2008) and the final approval of the implementation regulations R3-2009-0012.

This is the only opportunity citizens and communities in our region will have to stop the costly onsite regulations from being adopted.

Let the water board know that this resolution should be tabled now. New legislation is challenging statewide standards (AB 885) and this local effort is not essential, urgent and should be vetted along with the State plans for impacts.

This will impact property owners, builders and agriculturalists in San Martin, San Lorenzo Valley, Carmel Valley, Carmel Highlands, Prunedale, El Toro, Shandon, Templeton, Santa Margarita, Garden Farms, Los Osos, Baywood, Park, Arroyo Grande, Nipomo, Upper Santa Ynez Valley, Los Olivos and Ballard---as well as all septic systems in Santa Cruz, Monterey, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo Counties and parts of adjoining counties.

15 comments:

Realistic1 said...

Ann,

Why is this a "stealth" update?

Was the meeting publicly noticed according to the law?

What do you want them to do, take out a full page add in every paper in California?

I agree the topic is important, but why must you always imply the Water Board is trying to do something behind people's backs?

Sewertoons said...

"This is the only opportunity citizens and communities in our region will have to stop the costly onsite regulations from being adopted."

Arggghhhhhh!

Right - we REALLY should just stay with the toothless regs we have now and keep right on polluting. It is our RIGHT to pollute!! Sounds like the sewer obstructionists can have a whole new playing field! Go Gail!

Mike said...

Don't you mean....

"This is the only opportunity citizens and communities in our region will have to stop ANY SEWER FROM EVER BEING CONSTRUCTED."

Remember how well the PZLDF has stopped those "...costly onsite regulations from being adopted." ...and how promptly PZLDF paid their contractual portion of the legal costs...

Churadogs said...

"I agree the topic is important, but why must you always imply the Water Board is trying to do something behind people's backs"

If you live outside the PZ, did you receive a little post card telling you of the local "hearings" or even basic information on this and how it will affect you? No? How's about a flyer sent to all septic tank owners 'splainin' how the new regs will impact you? No? Hmmm, how odd.

"Right - we REALLY should just stay with the toothless regs we have now and keep right on polluting. It is our RIGHT to pollute!!"

Nope. Got that wrong, again. What we need are GOOD, scientifically based regulations being admnistered by a COMPETENT RWQCB staff,with a better set of regulatory/legal checks and balances in place for resolving confilicts and problems and preventing regulatory abuse.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ann,

I never received a post card after the recall that said the board would be holding an emergency meeting to stop construction on TriW even though that would violate the terms of our contract with the SWRCB. Did the LOCSD board after the recall explain to us that this action would destroy our town and lives before they took that vote? I guess that was a stealth action.

We get your point, Ann, but at one point the burden rests on the individual in our society.

The RWQCB and staff have been exceedingly patient with Los Osos (with one exception) by comparison to other entities like CMC. That you don't like their authority and decisions doesn't make their staff incompetent or their decisions flawed or their actions an abuse of power.

Sewertoons said...

I don't get a postcard in the mail from the DMV and they seem to "stealth in" new road rules every year. I'll get a ticket if I don't follow them, too!

But I do get fold-outs written in mice type from my credit card companies every year telling me of their changes in rates and policies. Of course, I AM paying for them to write, print and mail that…

Sewertoons said...

Did anyone see or hear the meeting? I heard some of it - couldn't get the video to work, but then I went out - what happened?

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"I never received a post card after the recall that said the board would be holding an emergency meeting to stop construction on TriW even though that would violate the terms of our contract with the SWRCB."

apples and oranges. The Stealth Update is the ONLY chance you'll get to comment or object. Once it's passed, you're toast and you'll have no say or vote or appeal. If you know nothing about it, you have no voice, no "vote."
In the recall matter, the voters voted to recall the directors and elect new directors who said they'd stop that project and move the plant out of town.

Inlet also sez: That you don't like their authority and decisions doesn't make their staff incompetent or their decisions flawed or their actions an abuse of power."

It does when you single out 45 people and prosecute them, put CDOs on their homes and leave the rest of the town free and clear. This abuse is specially egregious when the RWQCB was asked repeatedly, under oath, at their kangaroo court, did they have any evidence that Person X was polluting the waters of the state of california? and they kept answering. . . NO. That's regulatory abuse, Inlet, plain and simple.

Toonces sez:"Of course, I AM paying for them to write, print and mail that…"

Guess who pays for the entire Water Boards, including the RWQCB? Yep, you do. These people are public servants, pay for by all of us.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ann,

What about the LOCSD adding something to the schedule without announcing it first and then voting on it? What if, even worse, it is to retroactively approve of an action which was legally questionable?

Would you complain then about no citizen input? Would you complain that such actions are an abuse of authority?

Oh yeah ... you didn't back when it happened. Oh yeah, you deftly avoided the issue then by refusing to address it at all. As part of the Recall Cheering Squad (RCS ... you know "gimmie an R .... gimmie an E ... gimmie a C ...") you just overlooked all abuses by the post-recall board.

When the board chose to retroactively approve of a transfer of funds from a restricted account back in the Summer of 2006 ... was that a stealth action?

If you can justify not criticizing the LOCSD then your outrage of the announced stealth action would make some sense. Unless you do that it will be clear that you don't really care about competence and process (because clearly that action by the LOCSD both violated process and was because of incompetence) but you care only about supporting Lisa and Chuck ("gimmie a C .... gimmie an H ... gimme a U ...")

Mike said...

Ann...

"Guess who pays for the entire Water Boards, including the RWQCB? Yep, you do. These people are public servants, pay for by all of us."

...PUBLIC SERVANTS...????

Hardly servants, the people who work for the various governments are not your personal "SERVANTS"... They work in a system known as Public SERVICE.... They do not make the laws of this society, but work to enforce those laws...and they are paid through taxes enacted by those laws.

You Ann, seem to think that the RWQCB is some sinister rogue agency out to crush little innocent Los Osos... When will you grow up and realize you are just a silly old woman trying to overthrow the government....???

I might add, when are you going to reimburse the CSD for the failed PZLDF legal fees over your poorly prepared personal lawsuit...???

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE wrote: They do not make the laws of this society, but work to enforce those laws...and they are paid through taxes enacted by those laws.

MIKE, Please point us to the legislative act that supports 83-13.

Sewertoons said...

Ann says about the Water Board, "(They) single out 45 people and prosecute them, put CDOs on their homes and leave the rest of the town free and clear.

I got a NOV in the mail - what's that? I'm free and clear?

Funny, that's NOT what it said…

Churadogs said...

Mike sez:"You Ann, seem to think that the RWQCB is some sinister rogue agency out to crush little innocent Los Osos... When will you grow up and realize you are just a silly old woman trying to overthrow the government....???"

You're making stuff up again, Mike.

toonces sez:" got a NOV in the mail - what's that? I'm free and clear"

You do not have a finalized CDO against your property. 45 people do. Big difference.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

So Ann ... by your lack of response on the issue of misuse of funds by the LOCSD board should we surmise that you approved of the stealth action?

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette wrote: Funny, that's NOT what it said…
Lynette, What did Mr. Dean (I forgot his last name) say???

Steve, Did you ever fly that kite?